KazooSkinsFan wrote:The only people who are offended by the name are the people who want to be offended, and as they want to be offended, they will be offended no matter what anyone does.

Just say no ... to political correctness.

Political correctness has nothing to do with being sensitive to anyone, it's a weapon. For people who preach tolerance, the politically correct crowd demonstrate none.

I think this applies to the online magazines (Slate, others who love to simply pick up the mantle of any cause) who have decided that they won't even print the name of my team because of its obvious racism. I'm not sure it does to Suzan Harjo and her camp. If someone is offended, not for the sake of being offended, but actually offended (you do believe that someone can be offended, right? I ask because if you don't then this point is moot.) then it seems silly for someone who isn't offended to simply tell them they are being ridiculous for x y and z reason. I mean, being offended is an emotional not an intellectual response in the first place.

I don't think whether the name is offensive can be decided by the majority who thinks it isn't or the vocal minority (no matter small or large) that thinks it is. Some kind of reason and logic has to be brought to be bear to decide this question. As does the realization that not everyone is going to be happy with the result. I think that taking the history of the team's name, the way we fans used to and still do celebrate our team and it name, the way the term has been used throughout history outside of the context of our team, and quite frankly figuring out how Native Americans (as many and as broadly as possible) feel about the name and weighing all of that together is pretty much the only way this gets resolved. Anyone who has a problem with it after that is just SOL. I also think that that calculus results in the name staying. I understand why proponents don't want to bother with all of that and why detractors won't be satisfied until they get it, and probably not even afterward if it ends up with "Redskins" still sticking around, but I think its a worthwhile exercise anyway.

+1 A good way of looking at the issue.

"I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need. You draft the best available football player on the board. ... Because, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games." - Scot McCloughan

I think they should change the name because I am a liberal and that's how I roll. However, I don't think they should be forced to change the name so unless The Danny chooses to change the name I am agaisnt it. Plus I don't want a stupid name. I think it would be cool if they did like the NY Giants baseball and football teams did back in the day. They could be the Washington Football Nationals (or Senators). But no matter, I am too old to call them anything but Redskins. I still say the California Angles for example.

cleg wrote:I think they should change the name because I am a liberal and that's how I roll. However, I don't think they should be forced to change the name so unless The Danny chooses to change the name I am agaisnt it. Plus I don't want a stupid name. I think it would be cool if they did like the NY Giants baseball and football teams did back in the day. They could be the Washington Football Nationals (or Senators). But no matter, I am too old to call them anything but Redskins. I still say the California Angles for example.

+1, I like your honesty, cleg. Nicely stated. Not my view, but I like the way I stated yours.

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

I have always backed the name because I am a liberal and a history major and I suspect that the name was chosen to suggest the Boston Braves baseball team (then Milwaukee, now Atlanta), and I think "Braves" was meant to remind people of the Liberty Boys who dressed as Indians when they dumped tea in Boston Harbor.

However, I had a jolt about a month ago when I looked through you-tube for old episodes of The Lone Ranger. I grew up with that show, and remember the 90-minute "pilot" episode. I found it. At one point, the Lone Ranger sends Tonto into town to get help from the deputies. The deputies refuse, saying, aproximately, "Get out of here, you redskin".

The deputies (plot spoiler) are working for the bad guy, and I realized that the script-writers had given them that line -- "redskin" as a term of abuse -- as a tipoff.

I can't imagine another name for the team, but I'm not as comfortable as I was.

welch wrote:I have always backed the name because I am a liberal and a history major and I suspect that the name was chosen to suggest the Boston Braves baseball team (then Milwaukee, now Atlanta), and I think "Braves" was meant to remind people of the Liberty Boys who dressed as Indians when they dumped tea in Boston Harbor.

However, I had a jolt about a month ago when I looked through you-tube for old episodes of The Lone Ranger. I grew up with that show, and remember the 90-minute "pilot" episode. I found it. At one point, the Lone Ranger sends Tonto into town to get help from the deputies. The deputies refuse, saying, aproximately, "Get out of here, you redskin".

The deputies (plot spoiler) are working for the bad guy, and I realized that the script-writers had given them that line -- "redskin" as a term of abuse -- as a tipoff.

I can't imagine another name for the team, but I'm not as comfortable as I was.

Not saying we should change the name but I have pretty much always had the same discomfort. I grew up hearing it as a perjorative in many westerns and that is pretty much how I've always heard it used outside the context of our team.

For example, I don't think I've ever heard a newscaster use the term except when talking about our team - not in over 50 years of watching.

If he feels that our name is offensive I cannot be mad at him for taking this stance even though I do not agree with our name being offensive. Wish folks, however would do more research before they make actions like this. There is nothing negative in the color "red". If we were named the stinkskins or the dirtyskins that is another story but "Red"Skins?

What is offensive are the terms you use before or after the adjective Redskins to describe an individual or in this case our team.

It bothers me to know that some people will think that the name Redskins is the same as calling a black person a N****. Thats ridiculous.

As far as the Native Americans that are sensitive towards the name, I believe it's the same as when a group of black activists wanted blacks to be labeled as African Americans instead of "black." You will always have a small group that disagree because of their very strong views, but in reality blacks from a full scope of things didn't care whether or not "black" was used because for the most part it wasn't used in a negative sense.

The issue should die down now that the season has started, however I believe Redskin pr team should be more pro-active in the future educating fans and groups how our name became, how our logo was designed and approved by a Native American.